Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Cal) 147

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI
JOYMALYA BAGCHI, GAURANG KANTH, JJ.
Bhabesh Das - Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal - Respondent
C.R.A. 14 of 2021
Decided on : 29-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Arijit Ghosh, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, Ms. Namrata Das, Adv.

The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and circumstantial evidence must unerringly point to the accused's guilt.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 498A and 302 - Conviction for murder and cruelty - Appellant convicted for life imprisonment for murder and three years for cruelty, both sentences to run concurrently - Evidence established that appellant tortured the deceased for dowry and ultimately killed her with a bamboo stick - Prosecution proved case beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 1, 24, 26)

(B) Evidence - Standard of proof - The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the circumstantial evidence must point unerringly to the guilt of the accused. (Paras 22, 25)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of his wife, Gita, who was subjected to cruelty and ultimately killed by a bamboo strike on 30.10.2008. The prosecution presented 16 witnesses, and the appellant's defense was one of innocence and false implication. (Paras 2, 4)

Findings of Court:
The court found overwhelming evidence of the appellant's guilt, including witness testimonies and medical reports confirming the cause of death as head injuries. (Paras 22, 24)

Issues: The main issues were whether the appellant committed murder and whether the evidence of cruelty was sufficient to uphold the conviction. (Paras 21, 24)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the evidence of financial demands and torture was consistent and credible, leading to the conclusion that the appellant had the intention to murder, supported by the nature of the injuries inflicted. (Paras 22, 24)

Result: Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld. (Paras 26, 27)

Table of Content
1. prosecution case against appellant (Para 2)
2. defense claims innocence (Para 6)
3. witness testimonies corroborated (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. evidence of financial demands (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
5. intention to murder established (Para 23 , 24)
6. appeal dismissed; conviction upheld (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)

JUDGMENT :

Joymalya Bagchi, J.

1. Appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 17.12.2015 and 18.12.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mathabhanga, Cooch Behar in Sessions Case No.301 of 2011 (Sessions Trial No.02 (07) of 2012) convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Sections 498A/302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months more for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months more for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code; both the sentences shall run concurrently.

Prosecution case:-

2. Prosecution case as levelled against the appellant is as follows : Deceased Gita was married to one Bhabesh Das on 11th Magh, 1410 (i.e. 26.01.2004). At the time of marriage, dowries and other gifts were given to the appellant. From the wedlock a male child was born. Appellant was addicted to liquor and used to take large sums of money from his in-laws. He used to physically assault his wife. Matter was brought to the notice of local people including the Panchayat authorities. But he did not mend his ways and continued to torture. Finally, on 30.10.2008 appellant assaulted Gita with a bamboo on her head. As a result, Gita died. Appellant tried to flee away but was detained by local people and handed over to police.

3. On the written complaint lodged by the victim’s father, namely, Prafulla Chandra Das (since deceased), Ghoksadanga Police Station Case No.114 of 2008 dated 30.10.2008 under Sections 498A/302 IPC was registered for investigation.

4. During investigation, appellant was arrested and charge sheet was filed against him. Charges under Sections 498A/302 IPC were framed against the appellant. In course of trial, prosecution examined sixteen witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. Defence of the appellant was one of innocence and false implication. During his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, appellant contended he was returning home after work when he was caught on the road and falsely implicated in the case. However, he did not lead defence evidence to probabilise his ALIBI.

5. In conclusion of trial, learned trial Judge by impugned judgment and order dated 17.12.2015 and 18.12.2015 convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid.

Arguments at the bar :-

6. Mr. Arijit Ghosh argued there is no direct evidence that appellant had committed the murder. He used to work in a plywood factory and his presence at the house has not been proved beyond doubt. During his examination under 313 CrP.C he claimed he was apprehended by local people when he was returning from work. PW 2 who had deposed that he had seen the appellant throw a bamboo stick and run away is not a truthful witness. His deposition is not corroborated by other club members namely PWs 7, 8 and 11. Moreover, no villager has been examined to prove that multiple SALISHES were held. Allegation of demand of money and torture for non-payment of the same is improbable as evidence has come on record appellant had transferred his properties in the deceased’s name. Accordingly he prayed for acquittal.

7. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor submits PW 1 (uncle), PW 3 (Mother) and PW 4 (Sister) deposed appellant used to torture the deceased over demands of money. PW 2 saw the appellant run away from the place of occurrence after throwing